Progression of hippocampal subfield atrophy and asymmetry in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) affects the hippocampus during its progression, but the specific observable changes of hippocampal subfields during disease progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we employed an event-based model (EBM) to determine the sequence of occurrence of hippocampal subfield atrophy in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD cohorts. Subjects (207) were included: 86 MCI, 53 AD, and 68 healthy controls from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Participants underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to analyse the hippocampal subfields. We assigned each patient to a specific EBM stage, based on the number of their abnormal subfields. A combination of 2-year follow-up MRI scans were applied to demonstrate the longitudinal consistency and utility of the model's staging system. The model estimated that the earliest atrophy occurs in the hippocampal fissure, then spreading to other subregions in both MCI and AD. We identified a marked divergence between the sequences of left and right hippocampal subfields atrophy, so inter-hemispheric asymmetry pattern was further analysed. The sequence of asymmetry index (AI) increases beginning in the molecular and granule cell layers of the dentate gyrus (GC-ML-DG), cornus ammonis (CA) 4, and the molecular layer (ML). Longitudinal analysis confirms the efficacy of the model. In addition, the model stages were significantly correlated with patients' memory scores (p < .05). Collectively, we used a data-driven method to provide new insight into AD hippocampal progression. The present model could aid in understanding of the disease stages, as well as tracking memory decline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".